DOCSLIB.ORG

Guide to the Southwest LRT Supplemental Draft EIS (English)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Guide to the Southwest LRT Supplemental Draft EIS (English) EDEN PRAIRIE | MINNETONKA | HOPKINS | ST. LOUIS PARK | MINNEAPOLIS SOUTHWEST LRT (METRO GREEN LINE EXTENSION) Guide to the Supplemental Draft EIS The Southwest Light Rail Transit Supplemental Contents Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is a supplement to the Southwest Transitway Draft About the Southwest LRT Project .............. 2 EIS. This guide is intended to help locate infor- About the Supplemental Draft EIS ............. 4 mation and submit comments on the Supplemen- The Design Adjustment Process ............... 4 tal Draft EIS. POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF DESIGN ADJUSTMENTS Eden Prairie Segment ....................... 6 In response to public comments received on the Southwest Transitway Draft EIS, the Metropolitan Operations & Maintenance Facility ............. 8 Council made changes to the proposed design of the St. Louis Park/Minneapolis Segment ........... 10 Southwest Light Rail Transit (LRT) Project. The Supple- mental Draft EIS analyzes the potential adverse impacts HOW TO REVIEW AND COMMENT of those changes. Commenting on the Supplemental Draft EIS .... 17 Hearings on the Supplemental Draft EIS ........ 18 This guide does not attempt to summarize every po- tential impact discussed in the Supplemental Draft EIS. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Instead, it highlights key changes to the Project that Locally Requested Capital Investments ......... 19 could result in new adverse impacts since the publica- tion of the Draft EIS. The Metropolitan Council will hold public hearings on The Executive Summary of the Supplemental Draft EIS the Supplemental Draft EIS in June 2015. See page 18 provides additional information that can help you locate for hearing dates and locations. information and understand the potential impacts dis- cussed in the Supplemental Draft EIS. If you have questions about the Southwest LRT Project or the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the The public is encouraged to review and comment on Minnesota Environmental Policy Act (MEPA), or if you the Supplemental Draft EIS during the public comment need assistance accessing the Supplemental Draft EIS, period, from May 22 to July 21, 2015. The Supple- please contact the Southwest LRT Community Outreach mental Draft EIS and the Draft EIS are available on the Coordinator for your area listed on page 19. Southwest LRT Project website, www.swlrt.org, and the Supplemental Draft EIS is available in printed form at This guide is intended for informational purposes multiple locations in communities along the proposed only. Comments may only be made on the LRT route during the public comment period. See page Supplemental Draft EIS, not this Guide. In the 17 for more information on obtaining a copy of the case of any differences between this guide and the Supplemental Draft EIS and submitting comments. Supplemental Draft EIS, rely upon the Supplemental Draft EIS as the official analysis. 1 06/2015 ABOUT THE SOUTHWEST LRT PROJECT The Southwest Light Rail Transit Project (METRO employment centers like the Golden Triangle in Eden Green Line Extension) is a proposed transit line Prairie. that would operate from downtown Minneapolis Hennepin County and the cities of Eden Prairie, Min- through the communities of St. Louis Park, netonka, Hopkins, St. Louis Park and Minneapolis are participating agencies in the Southwest LRT Project. Hopkins, Minnetonka, and Eden Prairie, passing in close proximity to Edina. The total cost of designing and building the Southwest LRT Project would be approximately $1.65 billion dol- The proposed alignment would include 17 new sta- lars.* Funding would come from several sources. tions and approximately 16 miles of double track. The line would connect major activity centers in the region The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) would provide including downtown Minneapolis, the Opus/Golden Tri- half of the required funding, approximately $827 mil- angle employment area in Minnetonka and Eden Prairie, lion. The Counties Transit Improvement Board (CTIB) Methodist Hospital in St. Louis Park, the Eden Prairie would provide approximately 30 percent of the required Center Mall, and the Minneapolis Chain of Lakes. funding, or approximately $496 million. The Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority (HCRRA) and the Southwest LRT would be an extension of the METRO State of Minnesota would each provide approximately Green Line (Central Corridor LRT), providing a one-seat 10 percent of the total, or $165 million dollars. ride to destinations such as the University of Minne- sota, state Capitol and downtown St. Paul. It would be The Metropolitan Council is the local lead agency for part of an integrated system of transitways, including the Southwest LRT Project and the grantee of federal connections to the METRO Blue Line, the Northstar funds. The FTA is the federal lead agency. The U.S. Commuter Rail line, major bus routes, and proposed Army Corps of Engineers is a cooperating agency for future transitways and rail lines. Local bus routes near the Supplemental Draft EIS because of its responsibil- the proposed LRT alignment would be reconfigured to ity for implementing federal environmental regulations. connect stations with nearby residential, commercial and HCRRA served as the local lead agency during the de- educational destinations. velopment of the Draft EIS and public comment period, which ended in December 2012. The area where the Southwest LRT line would operate, known as the Southwest Corridor, includes major region- al employment centers and growing residential commu- nities. Travel on roadways in this area has increased over the past 25 years. The Metropolitan Council’s regional forecast indicates that population and employment in the Southwest Cor- ridor will continue to grow, causing traffic congestion to * On April 27, 2015, the Council released a revised project cost increase further. estimate of approximately $1.994 billion – an approximately $341 million increase over the year-of-expenditure budget. The proposed Southwest LRT line would add a reliable The additional costs are primarily related to poor ground transit option that connects people with jobs throughout conditions along the Southwest LRT line, soil contamination the Southwest Corridor. Light rail service would benefit in St. Louis Park and Hopkins, project delays due to additional studies, and property acquisitions and relocations. The funding “reverse commute” workers who live in Minneapolis strategy discussed in Chapter 5 of the Supplemental Draft EIS or St. Paul and travel to work in Southwest Corridor remains under discussion for the additional costs. 2 GUIDE TO THE SOUTHWEST LRT SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT EIS The Southwest LRT Corridor and Supplemental Draft EIS Study Areas LEGEND City Boundary Existing Freight Rail 47 M i s Proposed Southwest LRT 52 s i s Plymouth s Existing LRT Station i p p Union Pacific RR i Proposed LRT Station R ive r (P&R) Park-and-Ride Lot Golden Valley Target Field Supplemental Draft EIS 55 Station Royalston Study Area (Existing) Station 7th St S Proposed Hopkins Operation 10th St S 394 Wayzataand Blvd Maintenance Facility (OMF) Van White Station ( Penn I Station Cedar 0 0.75 1.5 Lake 21st Street ) Station Mile ) A P R Lake of R Minneapolis C ( C the Isles ) r (H SF u ivision (BN r d p ub do Way S S ri West Lake zata Cor St. Louis Park rth Station S lwo & ni Lake N Ke Beltline M Station (P&R) Calhoun Wooddale Station Louisiana Hopkins Station (P&R) St. Louis Park/Minneapolis Minnetonka Segment Shady Oak Bass LakeBlake Spur (CP) Station (P&R) Station (P&R) Lake 7 Harriet Downtown Hopkins 35 Hopkins OMF Station (P&R) M in e h a h a C k re e Opus Ni ne Station (P&R) M 121 i City West le C Crosstown Hwy Station (P&R) re ek 62 Edina Bryant Lake Golden Triangle Station (P&R) Southwest Mitchell Station (P&R) Station (P&R) 494 5 Eden Prairie Town Center Station (P&R) Eden Prairie Segment Eden Prairie P y Cr u tor ee 169 rga k Flying Cloud Dr GUIDE TO THE SOUTHWEST LRT SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT EIS 3 PLN_AndersonEngineering_SWLRT_OverallAlignment_8x11_Rev00_00_20131016 ABOUT THE SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT EIS The Supplemental Draft EIS examines three areas stations; potential effects of changes in freight rail op- along the proposed Southwest LRT alignment erations. where new adverse environmental impacts Transportation effects: Planned changes in public tran- could occur due to design adjustments since the sit service; impacts on private vehicle traffic, freight rail service, bicycle and pedestrian networks, and parking; publication of the Draft EIS. safety and security. A Supplemental Draft EIS is needed because the Fed- Environmental Justice compliance: The Environmental eral Transit Administration (FTA) and the Metropolitan Justice analysis looks at the project’s potential effects on Council determined that design adjustments made to minority and low-income populations. the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) after publication of the Draft EIS could result in new adverse environmen- Draft Section 4(f) evaluation: Documentation of the tal impacts that were not identified in the Draft EIS. project’s activities under the requirements of Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966, a federal law that protects publicly owned parks, recre- Topics in the Supplemental Draft EIS ation areas and wildlife refuges as well as publicly and Purpose and need: Reasons for constructing the privately owned historic properties. Southwest LRT project, including improving access and mobility, providing a cost-effective transit option and Public and agency coordination:
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Technical Memorandum No. 3 Definition of Alternatives
    Southwest Transitway Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum No. 3 Definition of Alternatives Prepared for Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority Prepared by: PB Americas, Inc. (PB) January 2007 Table of Contents 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1 2. Background and Assumptions ..................................................................................... 1 3. Methodology.................................................................................................................2 4. Transit Technology Screening ..................................................................................... 4 5. Definition of Initial Alternatives................................................................................... 11 6 Refined Alternatives .................................................................................................. 36 Appendix A. Transit Technology Screening ..................................................................A-1 Appendix B. Southwest Transitway Corridor Inventory of Studies................................B-1 Appendix C. Agency/Stakeholder Meetings to Refine Initial Alternatives .................... C-1 Appendix D. Definition of the Refined Alternatives ....................................................... D-1 Appendix E. References ...............................................................................................E-1 Appendix F. BRT Typical Sections................................................................................F-1
    [Show full text]
  • ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEETS EAW Comment Deadline: June 15, 2011
    Publication Date: May 16, 2011 Next Publication: May 30, 2011 Vol. 35, No. 10 Submittal Deadline: May 23, 2011 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEETS EAW Comment Deadline: June 15, 2011 Project Title: Project Title: Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority MN&S Freight Rail Study Description: The Proposed Action consists of required track improvements to the existing Canadian Pacific Railway (CP) Bass Lake Spur, CPMN&S Spur, and the BNSF Railway (BNSF) Wayzata Subdivision in the city of St. Louis Park to accommodate the proposed relocation of the Twin Cities and Western (TC&W) freight rail traffic currently operating in the Kenilworth Corridor in Minneapolis. A portion of the proposed BNSF siding extends into the city of Minneapolis. Copies of the EAW which documents the purpose and need of the project, along with the anticipated social, economic and environmental impacts, are available for public review beginning May 16, 2011, at the following locations: • Project website – http://mnsrailstudy.org • City of St. Louis Park Public Library – 3240 Library Lane • St. Louis Park City Hall – 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard • Hennepin County Public Library – 300 Nicollet Mall To afford an opportunity for all interested person, agencies and groups to be informed about the contents of the EAW, the RGU will host an open house on June 8, 2011 from 4:00 pm. – 7:00pm at St. Louis Park Recreation Center, Banquet Room, 3700 Monterey Drive, St. Louis Park. The EAW can be made available in alternative formats to individuals with disabilities by calling the Minnesota Relay Service at (800)627-3529. The EQB Monitor is a biweekly publication of the Environmental Quality Board that lists descriptions and deadlines for Environmental Assessment Worksheets, Environmental Impact Statements, and other notices.
    [Show full text]
  • FINAL REPORT SWLRT Engineering Evaluation of Freight Rail
    Submitted to Metropolitan Council Submitted by TranSystems March 21, 2014 FINAL REPORT SWLRT Engineering Evaluation of Freight Rail Relocation Alternatives SWLRT Engineering Evaluation of Freight Rail Relocation Alternatives FINAL REPORT Table of Contents I. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... ........... 1 II. Background ............................................................................................................................... ............ 2 A. TC&W Network and Operations ....................................................................................................... 2 B. Freight Rail Industry Changes ........................................................................................................... 4 III. Scope of Engineering Evaluation ....................................................................................................... 6 IV. Review of Past Studies ...................................................................................................................... 7 A. St. Louis Park Railroad Study (March 1999) ...................................................................................... 7 B. TCWR Freight Rail Realignment Study (November 2009) ................................................................. 7 C. Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan (January 2010).................. 7 D. Freight Rail Study – Evaluation of TCWR Routing Alternatives
    [Show full text]
  • Northstar Corridor Rail Project Work Group Report
    This document is made available electronically by the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library as part of an ongoing digital archiving project. http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/lrl.asp 04 - 0027 Northstar Corridor Rail Project Work Group Report Required by 2003 Minnesota Legislature Minnesota Session Laws of 2003 l't Special Session Chapter 19 - Section 75 Report Date: January 15,2004 r Northstar Work Group Report Draft January 15, 2004 Introduction The Northstar Corridor Rail Project is a proposed commuter rail project running northwest from downtown Minneapolis near the trunk highway 10 corridor. Potential stations, in addition to downtown, are Northeast Minneapolis, Fridley, Coon Rapids-Foley, Coon Rapids­ Riverdale, Anoka, Elk River, Big Lake, Becker, St. Cloud East, and Rice. The state share of funding for the project has been debated by the Minnesota Legislature since the 2000 session, but has not been authorized. Minnesota Session Laws of 2003, 1st Special Session, Chapter 19, Section 75 (see appendix A) required the commissioner of transportation, in conjunction with the Northstar Corridor Development Authority (NCDA), to convene a work group to perform two specific tasks: 1) Update ridership forecasts for Northstar commuter rail based on 2000 census data and 2) Seek updated information from the Burlington Northem Santa Fe railroad (BNSF) regarding capacity improvements, railroad usage rights, construction, risk and liability allocation, and other related issues. The commissioner must report this to chairs and ranking members of legislative committees having jurisdiction over transportation and capital investment by January 15, 2004. A work group was formed comprised of 22 people from the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT), NCDA, Northstar Corridor counties, and the Metropolitan Council with expertise in planning, transportation investment, project management, railroading, and the Northstar corridor.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix B.Doc
    B BACKGROUND MATERIAL SECTION 2 – PLAN ADMINISTRATION GUIDELINES 2.1 Governance It is assumed for the purposes of this System Plan that the ownership of commuter rail assets throughout the State of Minnesota would be in the public interest. In other words, the citizen taxpayers of the state would own the system – specifically those commuter rail assets that are separable from the freight rail facilities, systems, equipment and/or rights-of-way that are owned by the relevant freight railroads. There are several considerations that validate the assumption of public ownership: • The public sector is the logical administrator and overseer of public transportation services provided over rights-of-way owned and operated by multiple freight rail carriers. • Public policy dictates that commuter rail service be provided within the framework of a regional and potentially statewide, publicly funded multi- modal transportation system. • The public sector is the appropriate and responsible choice as manager of the expenditure of public funding required to plan, design, construct, operate and maintain such a system. • The provision of commuter rail service is not viable without substantial public sector financing, which would not likely be available under the auspices of private ownership. The commuter rail service sponsor is the public entity or combination of entities that serves as the public’s principal agent for or overseer of such service. As such, a sponsor serves at a minimum as the lead administrator or contracting entity for all services to be provided. All commuter rail services operated throughout the nation are owned by the public sector and sponsored by one or more public agencies through a variety of intergovernmental agreements.
    [Show full text]
  • State Rail Plan
    State Rail Plan DRAFT MARCH 2015 CONTACT LIST MnDOT Dave Christianson, Project Manager Office of Freight and Commercial Vehicle Operations [email protected] 651-366-3710 Dan Krom, Director Passenger Rail Office [email protected] 651-366-3193 Consultant Team Andreas Aeppli, Project Manager Cambridge Systematics, Inc. [email protected] 617-234-0433 Brian Smalkoski Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. [email protected] 651-643-0472 MINNESOTA GO STATEWIDE RAIL PLAN Draft Plan PAGE i TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTACT LIST ............................................................................................................................................. I TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................................ II EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. VII Overview of the Study .................................................................................................................................... vii Context of the 2015 Rail Plan Update ........................................................................................................... viii The Vision for Minnesota’s Multimodal Transportation System ...................................................................... ix Minnesota’s Existing and Future Rail System .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • MN Minneapolis METRO Blue Line Extension Engineering Profile
    METRO Blue Line Extension (Bottineau LRT) Minneapolis, Minnesota New Starts Engineering (Rating Assigned November 2016) Summary Description Proposed Project: Light Rail Transit 13.5 Miles, 11 Stations Total Capital Cost ($YOE): $1,536.18 Million (includes $30.0 million in finance charges) Section 5309 New Starts Share ($YOE): $752.73 Million (49.0%) Annual Operating Cost (opening year 2021): $26.66 Million 16,600 Daily Linked Trips Current Year Ridership Forecast (2014): 5,486,300 Annual Linked Trips 25,500 Daily Linked Trips Horizon Year Ridership Forecast (2035): 8,439,500 Annual Linked Trips Overall Project Rating: Medium-High Project Justification Rating: Medium Local Financial Commitment Rating: High Project Description: The Metropolitan Council (MC) is planning a light rail transit (LRT) extension of the METRO Blue Line from the existing Target Field LRT station in downtown Minneapolis to Brooklyn Park in suburban Hennepin County serving the suburban municipalities of Golden Valley, Robbinsdale and Crystal. The proposed alignment is mostly at grade and generally parallels freight rail and roadway rights of-way. The Project also includes 28 light rail vehicles, a new operations and maintenance facility in Brooklyn Park, four new park-and-ride facilities with approximately 1,700 total spaces, seven LRT bridges, and pedestrian and bicycle access to stations. Service is planned to operate every ten minutes during the day and every ten to 30 minutes during the evening on weekdays, and every ten to 15 minutes on weekends. Project Purpose: The Project is intended to improve access to employment and activity centers. Outside of downtown Minneapolis, which has nearly 140,000 jobs and a growing population, key destinations in the Project corridor include North Hennepin Community College and a large, growing Target corporate campus near the northern end of the line in Brooklyn Park.
    [Show full text]
  • Freight Rail Study Report
    Freight Rail Study Evaluation of TCWR Routing Alternatives Prepared for Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority Mark Amfahr Amfahr Consulting November 29, 2010 1 Table of Contents Executive Summary……………………………………………………………………………………………… 3 Introduction and methodology……………………………………………………………………………. 4 Discussion of “Western Connection” issues…………………………………………………………. 5 TCWR grain traffic……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 5 Summary of Alternatives…………………………………………………………………………………….. 7 Chaska Cut‐off…………………………………………………………………………………………. 8 Midtown Corridor…………………………………………………………………………………… 15 Highway 169 Connector………………………………………………………………………….. 23 Exhibits: Terms and abbreviations appearing in the report Chaska Cut‐off Map Midtown Corridor Map Highway 169 Map Cost detail – Chaska Cut‐off alternative Cost detail – Midtown Corridor Alternative Cost detail – Highway 169 Connector Midtown Streetcar Resolution Feb 10, 2010 document Midtown Streetcar Resolution Nov 21, 2006 document Twin Cities & Western Railroad map Twin Cities area map TCWR letter MNDOT map; Minnesota River Valley TCW Operations 2 Executive Summary In 2009, the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority (HCRRA) retained TKDA to conduct an alternatives analysis to identify all possible alternatives for routing Twin Cities and Western Railroad (TCWR) service to/from St. Paul. That study, the TCWR Freight Rail Realignment Study, 2009, identified a number of possible alternatives and evaluated them based upon engineering, freight rail operations, costs and impact to the transportation system. The objective of the analysis was to find a connection that would allow TCWR to operate economically between the Twin Cities metro area and the east end of their route network that currently extends to near Hopkins. The process began with a broad‐based review that was intended to identify all routes that could physically accommodate TCWR’s freight rail operation between those points within reasonable cost parameters.
    [Show full text]
  • April 11, 2019
    Minnesota Ballpark Authority Board Meeting Minutes – April 11, 2019 Chair Margaret Anderson Kelliher called the board meeting of the Minnesota Ballpark Authority for April 11, 2019 to order at 9:00 a.m. The roll was taken. Commissioners Paul Williams, David Ybarra and James R. Campbell were present. Commissioner Joan Campbell was absent. Commissioner James R. Campbell moved approval of the agenda, seconded by Commissioner David Ybarra and approved unanimously – 4 YEAS, 0 NAYS. APPROVED Commissioner Paul Williams moved approval of the January 10, 2019 meeting minutes seconded by Commissioner Campbell and approved unanimously – 4 YEAS, 0 NAYS. APPROVED Chair’s Report – Chair Margaret Anderson Kelliher noted that there would be a closed session at the end of the meeting for the performance evaluation of Executive Director Dan Kenney. Following the closed session, the meeting will reconvene and a summary of the evaluation will be provided as well as a resolution regarding the conclusions. Chair Anderson Kelliher also stated that she and Executive Director Kenney have been in discussions with the City of Minneapolis and BNSF regarding an easement for BNSF on the Cedar Lake Bike Trail. Resolution 150 on the meeting agenda addresses the issues being negotiated by the parties. Executive Director’s Report – Executive Director Dan Kenney reported that he has been working with the team regarding future planning for the ballpark including the scoreboard, ribbon boards and control room. Dave St. Peter and Executive Director Kenney plan to meet with the newly elected Hennepin County Board members in the coming months to update them on the accomplishments at the ballpark and to inform them of future plans for the facility.
    [Show full text]
  • 4910-06-P DEPARTMENT of TRANSPORTATION Federal Railroad Administration [Docket Number FRA-2020-0009] Petition for Waiver of Comp
    This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 01/30/2020 and available online at https://federalregister.gov/d/2020-01670, and on govinfo.gov 4910-06-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Railroad Administration [Docket Number FRA-2020-0009] Petition for Waiver of Compliance Under part 211 of title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), this provides the public notice that on January 13, 2020, the Metropolitan Council’s Metro Transit Division (Metro Transit), petitioned the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) for a waiver of compliance from certain provisions of the Federal railroad safety regulations contained at 49 CFR parts 214, 219, 220, 229, 235, and 236. FRA assigned the petition Docket Number FRA-2020-0009. Metro Transit operates two rail fixed guideway transit systems in Minnesota—the METRO Blue and Green light rail transit (LRT) Lines. Currently, the Green Line is 11 miles in length with 18 stations between Target Field Station in downtown Minneapolis, and Union Depot Station in downtown St. Paul, sharing 5 stations in downtown Minneapolis with the Blue Line. The Green Line LRT Extension Project, also known as Southwest Light Rail Transit Line (SWLRT), will add approximately 14.5 miles of standard-gage light rail double-track with 16 new passenger stations within Hennepin County, Minnesota, to the existing Green Line LRT operations. The SWLRT project will extend the existing Green Line from the Target Field/Interchange Station near the central business district of downtown Minneapolis through the communities of St. Louis Park, Hopkins, Minnetonka, and Eden Prairie, passing near Edina. The SWLRT line will terminate at the Southwest Station in Eden Prairie.
    [Show full text]
  • 4.0 Proposed Freight Rail Improvements and Investments (PDF)
    4.0 PROPOSED FREIGHT RAIL IMPROVEMENTS AND INVESTMENTS As noted in CHAPTER 3, the 2010 rail plan included a needs analysis for all freight and potential passenger rail corridors in Minnesota. This process was developed in a manner that allowed for a clear understanding of rail system needs for both current and future (2030) freight and passenger operations. A full needs analysis was not undertaken for the 2015 Minnesota State Rail Plan. Instead, projects identified on freight-only corridors in 2010 were brought forward as a basis for the update, and were complemented with crossing safety improvements and a qualitative description of capacity improvements in the past five years. The latter category incorporates projects recently identified in the 2014 Grade Crossing Safety Report compiled by MnDOT. For the most part, cost estimates presented in this document are general in nature, are reflected in original 2010 dollars and are not detailed engineering cost estimates. Although some corridors provide connections to points beyond the state border, this evaluation only reflects costs for work within Minnesota.60 More detailed information about the cost evaluation can be found in Appendix C, which also contains the detailed project list. This section is organized around previously identified capacity improvements on freight corridors—track, signal and bridge; weight, speed and track restrictions; and other major Class I improvments, followed by discussions of other potential investment areas including major capacity improvements, intermodal service expansion, positive train control, rail service relocation, and hazardous materials. Lastly, grade crossing safety needs across key crude oil corridors are specified. Overall rail needs and improvements are organized by freight rail operator and then by subdivision.
    [Show full text]
  • Cover, Signature Page, Executive Summary
    NORTHERN LIGHTS EXPRESS Northern Lights Express Passenger Rail Project from Minneapolis to Duluth, Minnesota Tier 2 Project Level Environmental Assessment April 2017 TIER 2 PROJECT LEVEL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT State Project Number: TCP-NLX-128 Federal Project Number: FR-HSR-0070-11-01-00 Northern Lights Express Passenger Rail Project from Minneapolis to Duluth, Minnesota From Target Field Station to the Depot in Duluth Counties: Hennepin, Anoka, Isanti, Kanabec, Pine, Carlton, and St. Louis of Minnesota and Douglas of Wisconsin Sections, Townships, Ranges: Multiple. See Appendix A. Submitted pursuant to 42 USC 4332, 64 FR 28545, M . S. 1160 and Wisconsin Administrative Code TRANS 400 By the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration and Minnesota Department of Transportation and Wisconsin Department of Transportation In cooperation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Federal Highway Administration and Surface Transportation Board This document is available in alternative formats to individuals with disabilities by calling the Minnesota Relay Service at 1-800-627-3529. Recommended for approval by: Date Office Director Fede ral Railroad Administration NLX Tier 2 Approved by: ) Daniel Krom . Director Passenger Rail Office Minnesota Department of Transportation Lynn P. Clarkowski, P.E. Date Chief Environment Officer Director, Office of Environmental Stewardship Minnesota Department of Transportation NLX Tier 2 Approved by: Di ector, Bureau of Technical Services Wisconsin Department of Transportation Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) signs as a Cooperating Agency under agreement between Minnesota and Wisconsin for the Northern Lights Express Project (November 2009) . This Wis DOT signatory approval is expressly limited to the adequacy of environmental elements under the jurisdiction of WisDOT, which does not include the system characteristics such as projected ridership, revenue, and/or project cost/benefit.
    [Show full text]